Ofcom is considering charging companies which want numbers in popular area codes, and getting rid of local phone dialling to eke out the existing number ranges.
The two measures are open to consultation until February next year. They are designed to provide more local phone numbers - which are running critically short - by …

COMMENTS

Page:

(untitled)

I am no expert but it seems to me that spreading out what you already have is, at best, a short term "sticking plaster" type of solution that isn't going to solve the real problem. Merely delay having to tackle it. That written, I guess any solution that involves grabbing more income from someone is likely to be favourable to those imposing it. But surely an extra digit to all the numbers would increase the range by a factor of ten, which would be much more useful. All you have to do is correct all the software that naively assumed number lengths were always going to be the same set length.

Turn the heating on

Dial area codes

I've kinda got in the habit of dialing area codes now along with the number so it's no biggie for me. I guess on some phones it might be able to program a local area code into a memory button anyway and even then lots of new cordless phones have phonebooks built in now.

Re: untitled

"All you have to do is correct all the software that naively assumed number lengths were always going to be the same set length."

You're making a naive assumption - the computer controlled exchanges I've worked on include the expected number length in the routing tree expansion for the various dialed numbers. They also include how many digits should be deleted from the front of the dialed number string or how many and what digits should be added and under what circumstances these actions should or should not be taken.

I'm not saying the change is trivial to implement (I've seen it done before on a national basis), but it's not outside BAU office data change processes and wouldn't require a software rewrite.

Other countries

I fully admit my ignorance on this subject, but I don't understand why a tiny country like the UK has had so many number changes (particularly London: 01, 071, 0171, 0207) whereas a huge country like the USA, with a vastly higher population, seems to use the same area codes year after year despite the fact that they don't use any more digits in their numbers than we do in ours.

California has been 213 for as long as I can remember (and apparently it has been the same since 1947).

Because..

Because.. well, it's complicated but it is all described here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_numbers_in_the_United_Kingdom#Introduction_of_area_codes

To put it briefly.. they moved London from 01 xxx yyyyy to 020 xxxx yyyyy over the years to increase the potential numbers tenfold, and brought all "normal" lines into a scheme beginning 01 or 02. You couldn't just do that all at the same time, it would be complete chaos (as 020x numbers already existed under the old scheme).. so renumbering tool several stages, and London got the worst of it.

And you are quite wrong about the 213 code, although it still exists it covers a much smaller area than it did in 1947: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_code_213

Because..

Because.. well, it's complicated but it is all described here: http://bit.ly/g0E4tL

To put it briefly.. they moved London from 01 xxx yyyyy to 020 xxxx yyyyy over the years to increase the potential numbers tenfold, and brought all "normal" lines into a scheme beginning 01 or 02. You couldn't just do that all at the same time, it would be complete chaos (as 020x numbers already existed under the old scheme).. so renumbering tool several stages, and London got the worst of it.

And you are quite wrong about the 213 code, although it still exists it covers a much smaller area than it did in 1947: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_code_213

555

changes

<pedant> 01 -> 071 & 081 -> 0171 & 0181 -> 020 </pedant>

London's 01 was "lost" because of long term plans to add the "1" digit to the front of *every* landline , and other digits for other types of number, so London had to change in the meantime. It was given two codes because numbers were already running out. Now they are back to one code, 020. It couldn't happen all at once otherwise we'd have been getting a LOT or wrong numbers being dialled!

Now we have different prefixes for different uses it's possible to tell, at a glance, what a given number is, and (to a certain extent) how much it costs. Previously, would you have been able to tell which of 0500 0625 and 0468 were the cheapest and most expensive?

With the exception of the areas that moved to 02x numbers, none of that actually increased the quantity of numbers available within an area code, it just made it easier to add more services and more area codes (particularly for 07 mobile numbers)

Originally 03 was to be used for more area codes, but it ended up being used for UK-Wide numbers. Maybe it should have been.

US area codes

You would be surprised to learn that in the US, number changes are too a PITA.

There are generally two ways they are accomplished:

1) splitting an existing area code, with the larger percentage of numbers staying with the existing area code; or

2) overlaying a second area code on top of an existing one. In this situation, new customer lines generally get the newer area code. This almost insures 10 (or 11) digit dialing. In my own area code, some numbers are 7 digits, others are 10 and some are 11 (what a fscking nightmare!!!)

The area where I live, had its original area code split up several times. Originally, the area code was 813, later 727, 863, 941 and 239 have been added to the same geographical area once covered by 813. Some customers went from 813 -> 941 -> 239 in a span of only a few years. Still NANPA (North American Number Plan Administrator) is concerned about number exhaustion. What are they going to do as area code prefixes dwindle is uncertain. Since North America (Canada, the USA, and many Caribean Islands share the +1 country code, one possibility is to append a second digit as the long distance dialing prefix. But that would NOT go over very well. Think of all of the legacy equipment and software designed for at most, a 10 digit telephone number! You can be sure people are going to bitch about it.

how many numbers in a phone number?

>> Think of all of the legacy equipment and software designed for at most, a 10 digit telephone number!

FFS another "won't anyone think if the children" whinge. The maximum length of an E.164 telephone number is 15 digits. So anyone who's deployed telephone kit that can't support this needs a good kicking. The Sale of Goods Act also applies, so if you've bought something that is so fundamentally broken, get the supplier/shop to replace it with something that isn't broken.

the 555 area code

The 555 area code in the North American Numbering Plan is reserved. It's not assigned to any area and exchanges can't route calls to this area code. This means 555 numbers can be safely used in things like films and TV programmes. It stops stupid fuckers calling these numbers in the hope of speaking to Charlie's Angels or whatever. Or having everyone who saw the film call a number which is actually in use. Ofcom has set aside parts of the UK numbering plan for drama purposes too.

And the rest

California has more than just 213. San Francisco uses 415, San Jose and other bits of the Bay Area use 408. 650 is used just to the left of that. Others in use are 310, 424, 323, 562 and a load more I can't be bothered to type - use Google (in 650) to find the full list.

@Jim Morrow

Follows what I've thought for years

Get everyone to dial the area codes, then gradually morph the area codes as part of the number itself. You end up with 9,999,999,999 UK phone numbers. Just how many does a 60M population need? With modern electronic systems there is no need for an area code, not even for billing purposes. You know exactly where every number is.

For the icing on the cake, introduce the telephone equivalent of DNS and you can forget the numbers altogether. Phone people and companies by name and address/postcode.

minimum

1000 number blocks

for "technical reasons" WTF??

So how many possible telephone numbers are there, and how many internet addresses? DNS works to say where to route an address, why not use the same system for telephone numbers? You shouldn't have to route a number by only looking at the first few digits any more, you should be able to route the whole thing. Just have a single directory for number vs. routing location!

area codes

There are 2000000000 numbers available for landline use in this country. Problem is we have an archaic reliance on area dialing codes. With a digital phone system it shouldn't matter what your code is. Why can't we just make all numbers non-geographic, if we do that we can even add the 03 series of numbers giving us an extra billion to go round.

I don't hear anyone worrying about running out of 07 numbers for mobiles, reason being they aren't restricted by where you live.

Broadband only lines with no phone number?

How about requiring BT Open Reach to offer households broadband without a traditional telephone service - and charging only for the broadband and not the often redundant landline. I don;t even know my landline number, and never use it.

what's the 0 for?

In the days of rotary-dial phones and Strowger exchanges - ask your grandparents - the initial 0 was used to tell the exchange you would be making a trunk call: going outside the local exchange in other words.

"Noone uses home phones except cold callers anymore"

he must be

a single person with unlimited budget and can not find the off button on his mobile. Everyone I know, all ages, prefers to use their land line when possible: cheaper, often better reception and anyone in the dwelling can answer the 'phone, with no problem over reception because the flat is covered in several floors of concrete, or the old house is in a hollow and made of granite or the battery has gone flat ....

Regarding mobiles and dialling area/supplier codes: I suspect that most of us ringing from a mobile ring numbers stored in the mobile most of the time and store the international prefix too as, it being a mobile, one may use it abroad. I suspect most private individuals rarely "dial" a number (except to save it to the 'phone memory) other than to ring a shop or some such and, even then, if it is the barber or the dentist, they probably store that too. Even on the landline, as the 'phone can store a couple of hundred numbers, I rarely dial a number as all my usual ones are stored in the device, whether at work or at home.

As for just extending numbers: quite apart from the software changes and configuration costs in private and public systems, the cost is unbelievable for the publicity/education alone, the organisation and so on. And never forget, the vast majority of the population use "technology" in all their devices in just the same way they use a kettle or a microwave - not a thought as to the technology behind it or even that it is a technical device and so no idea of more than the simplest functionality and no interest either as, like a kettle, all technology is just a means to get a job done so you can get on with the important things in life. Judging by many of the "informed" comment on these pages, even so-called technically aware people in reality do the same, knowing the jargon and not the technology.

In fact, as with all customer interfaces, if the average person does have to be aware and concerned, it is a bad interface - hence the success of Apple through providing the easiest interfaces for what most people want to do most of the time. The nerds who want to build their own 'phones, cars, computers can do that as their hobby while the rest of us just buy a device that works and get on with life. if it is too awkward to use, we get replace it or have the sense not to buy it in the first place (hence the failure of Linux to penetrate the mass market; I write that as a UNIX specialist who loves command line, pipes, filters....). This is why the way to use a telephone, in all its forms, has not changed fundamentally since its inception, within a few minutes of first acquaintance, it is easy to use for all ages and mental abilities and stays reasonably consistent across decades, even centuries.

"There aren't enough numbers, with suitable area codes, to go around "

It's not so much the area codes that matter for some callers and callees. It's the rate you're paying to call it.

Get all the corporate PABXs using vast number ranges for DDI (often to a tiny number of employees) to move to 03 numbers. Let them keep a "local" number or two for the switchboard etc if they wish. The rest of the staff get 03 numbers, for which standard landline charges apply [1].

Return the freed-up numbers to the available pool. Corporates get to keep their DDI (albeit with new numbers, but they can pick their own from a massive range).

Oh, and stop VoIP providers being allocated vast number ranges which they then proceed to use as nothing more than a cold-caller honeytrap. Yes AAISP, I'm looking at people like you - but at least you put your allocated but unused numbers to a constructive use, most don't.

Job done.

Ofcon can have my BACS details on request as I'm sure they'll pay me rather than some vastly expensive telco-funded marketing expert.

[1] 03 numbers are not premium rate numbers, contrary to several variants of the "Parcel Delivery Service" chainmail currently circulating.

No problem.....

..we'll do that.

Just provide the money to update all the litrature, update all the websites, telephone directories (including online one), increase the number of switchboard operators 10 fold and refund the lost business because the number no longer works. and I'm sure we'll happily do it.

this title contains letters and digits

"update all the litrature, update all the websites"

I'll come to that.

"refund the lost business because the number no longer works. and I'm sure we'll happily do it."

So have a planned transition then. Activate the new numbers. Calls to the old number get a recorded message with details of the new number. Three (?) months later the old numbers close, and after a suitable period (most of) the old number range is released for re-use.

How many of the DDIs need to be published in the literature, websites, etc?

Maybe ten or twenty? So the contacts of those ten or twenty people need to be notified, given a transition period, close down the 'old' number and after a suitable transition period return it to the 'available' pool. Not rocket science, is it?

So yes there's an issue with updating directories etc for the DDI numbers that move to 03, but it's a rather smaller issue (in volume) than moving from 0171 xxx to 020 7xxx.

"So not your average piss sized 5 empolyees."

Maybe not, but why would any 5-employee company want any worthwhile quantity of DDI numbers allocated to it ? Compare eggs with eggs please.

the title is required, but may be superfluous

With even the most basic of mobiles having a phone book, the comparison between mobiles and fixed lines seems shakey?

Is there anyone out there with some landline user demographics? I'd have expected a disproportionate number of people who're still using land lines to be more resistant to technological change and therefore the group that'd complain loudest about a big change to the numbering system.

How about give VOIP phones their own area code?

This will also stop dodgy bastards from having a VOIP call centre in Whereverthehell with an '020' or '0121' or whatever code to trick people into thinking they're calling a local operation.

Just a thought.

There are 2 main users of POTS landlines these days, small businesses and the elderly; both of whom would be messed around royally by mandatory area code dialling. Then again, a large proportion of Londoners (for example) haven't yet figured out that their area code is '020' and not '0207' or '0208'.

The title is required, and must contain letters and/or digits.

They did - 050 IIRC, but no one liked it.

VOIP is good when you have an office in a certain area, and the boss elsewhere - you can all be inside the local PBAX and have the same outgoing number...

Anyway, local area codes don't really work anyway, especially when part of the urban area is classed as being in a different town, you end up with local radio needing to include the numbers in full anyway.

Er, like 056?

There already is a UK VoIP area code (056), and a corporate area code (055), although at present there is not much incentive for VoIP providers to encourage use of the 056 code over a geographic code. Some providers, such as Voipfone do give you a free 056 number, and charge for a geographic one, but others, like Sipgate, hand out geographic numbers for no charge. Calls to 056 destinations may sometimes be charged at a higher rate depending on the calling network. For example, from BT payphones you only get 55s for 10p to a 056 number, as opposed to 900s for 10p to a geographic number, even though 056 calls are charged like 01 calls from domestic BT lines.

Tell me about it

The local part of my 020 number starts with 3, and I'm forever having to explain to people that I'm in London, it's not a new area code, the three is part of the local number, that's why it was changed from 0171, etc.

Signwriters who put 0207 and 0208 should be sent to Siberia for re-education! Or something.